Enhanced Error Indication Messaging for Wireless PHY-Layer Configuration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current FAPI error indication messages in 4G systems, such as those using the LTE standard, lack sufficient detail to pinpoint issues accurately, leading to prolonged debugging times and potential system crashes due to misconfigurations or errors, which can impact network performance and resource efficiency.

Innovation Solution

An enhanced error indication messaging system that provides progressive error checking and detailed error codes across multiple levels, including boundary range checks, protocol data unit validation, scheduling constraints, and memory alignment issues, allowing for precise identification of errors and logging of incorrect configurations to prevent future issues.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If standard FAPI error indication messages are used, then system complexity is reduced, but error detection precision and debugging efficiency deteriorate due to insufficient error detail

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detection precisionVSAvoiderror indication system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The error indication system is segmented into multiple hierarchical levels (Level 1: basic error detection, Level 2: detailed error classification, Level 3: comprehensive error analysis). Each level provides progressively more detailed error information, allowing the system to balance between precision and complexity by activating only the necessary depth of analysis for each situation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a new dimension to error indication by adding hierarchical error levels and detailed error codes that go beyond traditional binary error states. This multi-dimensional approach allows error information to be structured in layers, providing comprehensive precision without overwhelming system complexity through progressive disclosure of error details.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Measurement precision

If progressive error checking is implemented at multiple levels, then error identification accuracy improves, but processing time and computational resources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror identification accuracyVSAvoiddebugging time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary error checking at multiple hierarchical levels before full configuration installation. Level 1 checks basic syntax and format, Level 2 validates parameter ranges and constraints, and Level 3 verifies comprehensive configuration consistency. This preliminary multi-level validation prevents erroneous configurations from propagating further, significantly reducing debugging time by identifying errors early in the configuration process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements partial error checking by activating different levels of validation based on configuration criticality and system state. Not all configurations require full Level 3 analysis - less critical parameters may only undergo Level 1 or Level 2 checking. This selective approach maintains high error identification accuracy for critical parameters while reducing overall processing time through optimized validation depth.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If detailed error codes and multiple validation levels are provided, then system reliability improves through better error prevention, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoidconfiguration validation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The validation system is segmented into modular hierarchical levels with distinct responsibilities. Level 1 handles basic syntax validation, Level 2 manages parameter constraint verification, and Level 3 performs comprehensive configuration consistency checks. This segmentation allows the system to achieve high reliability through thorough validation while managing complexity through clear separation of validation functions and reusable validation modules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Measurement precision

If comprehensive error checking including boundary range, PDU validation, scheduling constraints, and memory alignment is performed, then error detection capability improves, but processing overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detection capabilityVSAvoidprocessing overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary checks for boundary ranges, PDU validity, scheduling constraints, and memory alignment at the point of configuration receipt, before full processing occurs. This preliminary validation prevents invalid configurations from consuming excessive processing resources during execution, thereby improving error detection capability while actually reducing overall processing overhead by filtering out erroneous configurations early.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11943050B2PHY error indication messaging
Publication Date: 2024.03.26 PARALLEL WIRELESS INC
  • US11943050B2 patent drawing
  • US11943050B2 patent drawing
  • US11943050B2 patent drawing

AI summary

This disclosure introduces an advancement to the error indication message to provide detailed information about errors in configurations that are arriving from the Layer 2 to the Layer 1. A method is disclosed, comprising: performing physical layer control (PHY) of a wireless signal at a Layer 1 (L1) software module; performing medium access control (MAC) of the wireless signal at a Layer 2 (L2) software module; providing an application programming interface between the L1 software module and the L2 software module for receiving L1 configuration messages and providing error codes to the L2 software module; receiving a L1 configuration message at a Layer 1 software module; and providing an enhanced error code progressively from a L1 software module to the Layer 2 (L2) software module.